Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 18 (0.24 seconds)

Sintex Oil And Gas Limited vs Union Of India & Ors. on 22 December, 2017

In a recent decision rendered by this Court in the case of SINTEX OIL AND GAS LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS decided on 01.01.2018, this Court has considered various decisions of the Supreme Court of India and held that in the absence of fraud of an FAO(OS)(COMM).229/2017 Page 8 of 14 egregious nature having been pleaded, stay of bank guarantee cannot be granted. This Court has held as under:
Delhi High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 1 - N Chawla - Full Document

U.P. State Sugar Corporation vs M/S. Sumac International Ltd on 4 December, 1996

11. The learned Single Judge has referred to three judgments of the Supreme Court to revisit the law as laid down by the Apex Court with regard to grant of injunctions against invocation of bank guarantees. The law is well-settled that the Court would not grant any injunction against invocation of an unconditional bank guarantee, except where fraud of egregious nature is alleged.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 385 - S V Manohar - Full Document

Dwarikesh Sugar Industries Ltd vs Prem Heavy Engineeing Work on 7 May, 1997

The learned Single Judge has referred to the judgments in the case of Dwarikesh Sugar Industries Ltd. v. Prem Heavy Engineering Works(P) Ltd., reported in (1997) 6 SCC 450; Vinitec Electronics Private Ltd. v. HCL Infosystems Ltd., reported in (2008) 1 SCC 544; and Gujarat Maritime Board v. Larsen and Toubro Infrastructure Development Projects Limited and Anr., reported in (2016) 10 SCC 46.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 870 - Full Document

Vinitec Electronics Private Limited vs Hcl Infosystems Limited on 2 November, 2007

The learned Single Judge has referred to the judgments in the case of Dwarikesh Sugar Industries Ltd. v. Prem Heavy Engineering Works(P) Ltd., reported in (1997) 6 SCC 450; Vinitec Electronics Private Ltd. v. HCL Infosystems Ltd., reported in (2008) 1 SCC 544; and Gujarat Maritime Board v. Larsen and Toubro Infrastructure Development Projects Limited and Anr., reported in (2016) 10 SCC 46.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 170 - B S Reddy - Full Document

Himadri Chemicals Industries Ltd vs Coal Tar Refining Company on 7 August, 2007

In Himadri Chemicals Industries Ltd. v. Coal Tar Refining Co. [Himadri Chemicals Industries Ltd. v. Coal Tar Refining Co., (2007) 8 SCC 110] , at para 14: (SCC pp. 117-18) "14. From the discussions made hereinabove relating to the principles for grant or refusal to grant of injunction to restrain enforcement of a bank guarantee or a letter of credit, we find that the following principles should be noted in the matter of injunction to restrain the encashment of a bank guarantee or a letter of credit:
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 256 - T Chatterjee - Full Document
1   2 Next